Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-59)
MR MARTIN
DINHAM, MR
DAVID HALLAM,
MR MICHAEL
ANDERSON AND
MR PETER
GOODERHAM
24 OCTOBER 2006
Q40 John Barrett: Can I touch again on
the UNICEF evidence? They were saying that Window I, for essential
supplies like health care in hospitals, is effectively not yet
operational; it is just not doing the job. Do you see any light
at the end of the tunnel at all? The blockage in the system is
apparently being provided by the Israeli Government. Is there
no movement at all?
Mr Dinham: This is on the TIM?
Q41 John Barrett: The TIM is not
effective. It is in place, and we heard the discussions about
funding, yet what we see is a blockage in the pipeline to deliver
the very basic supply of drugs to hospitals, fuel, water and it
is just not getting through.
Mr Dinham: Of the three Windows
that are working there are two, Window II and Window III, which
are essentially the responsibility of the European Commission
which are in operation and are working well. The first Window,
which has been the responsibility of the World Bank through its
ESSP[5]
programme, has not got into operation as quickly. I think they
have now sorted out the procurement issues around that and it
is due to be operating effectively from this month.
Mr Hallam: We cannot blame the
Israelis for Window I having not become operational. There are
two specific issues that have meant that it has taken a couple
of months. First, it takes time to procure drugs and hospital
supplies and so on, and the money arrived in late August so there
is a process that has to be gone through. The two specific issues
that have meant that perhaps it has not delivered quite as quickly
as I would have liked are first that there is quite a process
within the Palestinian government because, of course, the Ministry
of Health operates all of these clinics. There was a process between
the President's Office with our counterpart on the TIM and the
Ministry of Health to decide exactly what should be procured and
how and when and so on, and that took time. The second thing is
that because a lot of these things have been procured locally
to support the Palestinian private sector there was a process
of accreditation that had to be done to make sure again that,
because we are very concerned about corruption and to make sure
that we know exactly how much is being spent, they basically had
to be accredited and to make sure that things were to standard
and so on.
Q42 John Barrett: But does this not
all go back to saying that if you are not paying the healthcare
workers everything is going to take so much longer? If the money
is not freed up and is being held back everything will take 10
times as long.
Mr Hallam: That is why we identified
healthcare workers as recipients of allowances under the TIM.
Q43 Richard Burden: Education has
always been very important to the Palestinians in the Occupied
Territories and outside, and it is also, obviously, an area which
DFID highlighted as a priority area for achieving the Millennium
Development Goals. Again, going back to this Committee's previous
report about three years ago, it paints a rather bleak picture
of the situation in regard to what was happening to Palestinian
education. It said, "In a society where half the population
is under 18, the effect of closure on education is widely felt.
The psychological impact on children, arising from school closure
and exposure to violence, is damaging future generations of Palestinians
and will only serve to perpetuate the cycle of violence and hatred."
Your reply to that was that you agreed about that and noted that
more than 200,000 children and 9,000 teachers had been prevented
by closures and movement restrictions from attending schools.
Has the situation got better or worse since?
Mr Dinham: I do not have direct
facts on that, the others may have, but I would imagine the situation
has got worse because the closure situation has got worse and
also because the public strike which is currently going on means
that schools are not currently operational, which is making a
bad situation worse. We have, through the TIM, the Temporary International
Mechanism, our third allocation, which was agreed by the Secretary
of State a few weeks ago, of £3 million for poor Palestinian
workers, many of whom are in fact teachers, which will go some
way to helping that situation. But the overall situation, particularly
what you say about the psychological impact of violence on children,
is serious and is almost certainly getting worse.
Mr Hallam: I agree; I am sure
the situation is more difficult; there are more closures now,
so one would expect it to be more difficult.
Q44 Richard Burden: So what are we
doing about that? You have been developing contacts with the Israeli
Army about getting people through the checkpoints. How is that
going?
Mr Hallam: If I might come back
to the Israeli Army, my contacts are very much about DFID's reasonable
access.
Q45 Richard Burden: But that is the
problem, is it not? The kids and the teachers cannot get to school.
Mr Hallam: And the British Government
raises movement and access with the Israeli authorities very frequently.
Q46 Richard Burden: And what has
been the result? Any improvement?
Mr Hallam: Things have gone up
and have gone down, largely dependent on the perception of the
security environment, and so during 2005, when all the checkpoints
on the West Bank, for example, went down, there were signs of
optimism and the British Government was working very closely with
the Wolfensohn team, particularly on movement and access issues.
We are now in a new political context and security is much worse.
Q47 Richard Burden: Have there been
any achievements in lifting restrictions on access?
Mr Dinham: Since the Agreement
on Movement and Access was signed in November the situation is
worse than before it was signed.
Mr Gooderham: As David says, it
goes up and down depending on the day-to-day perception of the
Israeli authorities of the security threat. The European Union,
of course, has taken the lead in respect of Rafah and there is
now this Border Assistance Mission in place and we continue to
work with and on the Israeli authorities to ensure that the Rafah
crossing is open. We think the European Union has established
a track record there.
Q48 Richard Burden: I do not think
the Rafah crossing is particularly going to help teachers.
Mr Dinham: Not on the education
point.
Mr Gooderham: Sorry, I thought
you were asking about movement and access.
Q49 Richard Burden: Of teachers and
students.
Mr Gooderham: I see, I am sorry.
I do not have any information on teachers except that, as Martin
says, there has been a strike for some time in the West Bank.
Q50 Richard Burden: Last Friday the
Secretary of State for International Development answered a question
about Israeli procedures towards foreign nationals, including
those of Palestinian origin, who wanted to visit the Occupied
Territories to help as teachers or sometimes as students, and
in his answer he said, "Since spring 2006 the Israeli authorities
have been more strictly enforcing entry procedures towards foreign
nationals, including those of Palestinian origin, who wish to
visit the Occupied Territories. This includes would-be teachers
and students. As a result we estimate that hundreds of foreign
nationals have been refused entry. Our Embassy in Tel Aviv raised
our concerns with the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs in August."
You are also probably aware that the heads of all the Palestinian
universities and higher education institutions in the West Bank
have issued an appeal to the international community because they
are unable to operate as educational institutions. What are we
doing about that?
Mr Hallam: I can only answer that
we make representation to the Israeli authorities on movement
and access both bilaterally and also through the EU.
Q51 Richard Burden: Any responses?
Any glimmer of hope that they are listening?
Mr Hallam: There is not a great
deal of sign of it at the moment.
Q52 Chairman: Can I follow up something
that Ann McKechin was pursuing? Most of my colleagues have pointed
out that aid has increased because the economy has collapsed and
because money has been withheld; yet the Department for International
Development produced a White Paper that puts governance at the
heart of its policy. How is it possible for us to engage in the
Occupied Territories if we have no influence over the Government
of Israel and no ability to deal with the Palestinian Authority?
In any other state can you consider where DFID would have been
prepared to have any budget or any programme at all if there was
no government with whom they could effectively deal in order to
deal with the real poverty reduction issues?
Mr Anderson: I am sympathetic
with your point and the spirit behind it. I think the answer is
that this is not like any other country where DFID works. This
is a very different case. It is a unique case which is of enormous
importance to the broader Middle East, and of enormous importance
to the world. The two parties are stuck in a very difficult spot,
and the kind of difference we can make is by helping in whatever
way we can to try to move the peace process forward. The kinds
of standards that DFID would apply in many other places, apart
from the fiduciary risk and financial management which we are
very strict about, do not apply in quite the same way in the Palestinian
Territories. It often requires us to think of very innovative
ways and adopt approaches which are often against the grain but
what we recognise in the political context are necessary for advancing
the peace process, because advancing the peace process, no matter
how frustrating, has to be the ultimate goal of this programme.
Q53 Chairman: That is a perfectly
fair response but the practicalities are that the Government of
Israel is pursuing policies which are undermining the functioning
economy of the Palestinian people, destroying their livelihoods,
destroying their ability to earn money, and the international
community is picking up the bill. If we turned to the Government
of Israel and said, if they pursued their policy, "Will you
accept responsibility for the consequences? We are pulling out",
what do you think the Government of Israel would do?
Mr Anderson: I think our best
assessment is that the UK pulling out its assistance to the Palestinian
Territories—
Q54 Chairman: The Quartet.
Mr Anderson:— would probably
not result in enormous change in Israeli policy. In fact, Israeli
policies are, of course, the responsibility of the Israeli electorate.
Mr Dinham: But it would mean much
greater hardship for the Palestinians themselves.
Q55 Chairman: The point I am really
making is, are we not effectively letting the Government of Israel
off the hook in that they are not having to deal with the consequences
of the poverty that has been created? Let me also say quite plainly
that, of course, everybody acknowledges that Israel has been targeted
and Israel has suffered and Israel has a security problem and
Israel has some clear legitimate interest in dealing with that
problem, but that is not the point at issue. The point at issue
is that as a consequence of that, whether it is the closure policy,
whether it is Gaza and the West Bank and the withholding of revenues,
it leaves ordinary people, which in your report you say you do
not want to suffer, suffering inordinately. I think the words
you used, following the election, were that the UK did not wish
to punish ordinary Palestinians for the actions and policies of
their government, but it is ordinary Palestinians who voted for
that government and ordinary Palestinians who are suffering the
consequences of this. What I am really saying is, at the very
least where is the partnership between the international community
and the Government of Israel in dealing with the poverty?
Mr Gooderham: I think you make
a very fair point. This is the dilemma, as Martin has alluded
to. I am not going to pretend that we are particularly comfortable
with the situation we find ourselves in. As we have said repeatedly,
we continue to make representations to the Israeli Government,
in respect of both the clearance revenues and the movement and
access issues and other issues that are affecting the daily lives
of the Palestinian people, and we are not alone. Others in the
international community are doing similarly, but the dilemma is,
as I was trying to explain in an earlier comment I made, that
the way to get round that, the way to get over that, is to have
a Palestinian government with whom we can work and with whom Israel
can work, and that is what we have to achieve. We have had some
frustrations along the way over the previous months but we are
now under the impression that President Abbas is resolved to act
and to take decisions to bring about a government that is committed
to the three principles and with which we and others, including
Israel, can then work. From that we would then want to see very
rapid progress. I know that the Government as a whole and the
Prime Minister in particular is strongly committed to then pressing
very hard to see progress, but that has been the blockage, that
has been the obstacle in our way during the course of most of
this year. It has been frustrating and I think you make a perfectly
fair point, that the situation we find ourselves in is not satisfactory
and not one that we are comfortable with or want to see in place
for a day longer than it has to be.
Q56 Chairman: All I can say is that
on a number of occasions you have said that "we have made
strenuous representations to the Israeli Government", but
you take action against the Palestinian Authority. It is action
against the Palestinian Authority and representations to the Israeli
Government, which apparently do not yield much response. There
is a difference.
Mr Gooderham: It is our considered
view, and we are not alone, that the way to bring about change
in respect of the Israeli Government is through engagement and
dialogue and that is what we remain committed to. As I say, we
are not alone in that. That is the view of the international community
broadly. We have explained why we have difficulty with the current
Palestinian Authority. We had no difficulty with the previous
Palestinian Authority, with whom we worked perfectly normally,
and we have no difficulty with the Palestinian President and we
would very much like to get to a place where we have no difficulty
with the next Palestinian Authority government, but unfortunately
we are stuck in the situation where we are and we need to try
and move that on.
Mr Dinham: We are working with
the PLO which is responsible for the Negotiation Affairs Department,
which we have been working with for some time because the PLO,
of course, recognise the Roadmap and a peaceful solution to the
problems. We have been working with them to try and do whatever
is possible to rekindle this process. As Peter says, we have no
problem working with those representatives of the Palestinian
people who want to see a peaceful solution to the problem.
Q57 Mr Singh: It is very interesting
when you say that we need a Palestinian government that does this,
this and this. Yes, we do, but we also need an Israeli Government
at the same time which does not continue to trample over the human
rights of the Palestinian people. Is it not an irony that, in
an era when we have seen the coming down of the Iron Curtain,
the falling of the Berlin Wall, the opening of the Bamboo Curtain,
in the Middle East, along with the walls of hatred and mistrust
we have a physical barrier now? Do we not need an Israeli Government
which does not do this kind of thing in Palestine? What is the
impact that this barrier is having on our aid, development policies,
the economy of Palestine and the general wellbeing of the Palestinian
people?
Mr Dinham: It is one of the aspects
of the movement and access problem, a very serious aspect. We
have made our position very clear about the separation barrier,
which is that its establishment on Palestinian territory, on Palestinian
land, is contrary to international law and we have made those
representations to the Israeli Government. It has the effect of
cutting off some 10% of the Palestinian population, which is something
like 400,000 people, so those that fall on the west side of the
wall are stuck. It has had quite an impact on the social fabric
of communities. I visited a farmer near Qalqilya whose farm was
on one side of the wall and whose home and family were on the
other side, and only he could go through to look after the land,
which was becoming very difficult because his family could not.
He never knew whether the entrance through the wall was going
to be open or not, so the impact on the life of people in the
Territories of the barrier is quite excessive. As the Chairman
was saying, Israel certainly has a right to its own security and
we do not dispute that, but a separation barrier on Palestinian
land having the impact on Palestinian people that it has is not
satisfactory at all.
Q58 Mr Singh: Are there any examples
of the impact it has on the work of DFID?
Mr Dinham: Not in the sense of
it having an impact on projects and activities that we are doing,
but in the sense that we are there to try and help the economy
and relieve poverty it is one of the things which is standing
in the way of that, so it is in the way of our mission.
Q59 Mr Singh: Why can we not get
the Israeli Government to abide by the Agreement on Movement and
Access which it signed in 1985, was it?
Mr Hallam: 2005.
5 Emergency Services Support Programme. Back
| 
